Announcement

Collapse

Upgrade to fix search indexes

We will be upgrading www.trackforum.org at approximately 2019-05-21 14:30:00 Pacific Time. The site will be unavailable during the upgrade and you might experience broken styles, both of which shouldn't last for more than a few minutes. We'll let you know when the upgrade is complete via Facebook and Twitter
https://www.facebook.com/TrackForum/
https://twitter.com/TrackForumLive
See more
See less

Could DPi be ACO/FIA WEC savior?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by Jakester View Post
    Here's at least one Porsche 962, C or otherwise, that ran both IMSA and LeMans in 1990

    https://www.porscheroadandrace.com/d...-le-mans-1990/

    Not GTP, but the Cunningham 300ZX also ran in IMSA trim at Le Mans.
    That was in 1994, when Group C had imploded, the World Sportscar Championship was gone and the ACO was desperate for entries...strange how history repeats itself.
    "We let bygones be under the bridge..." AJ Foyt

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by DaveL View Post

      Fine, whatever, arrest me, toss me in jail and throw away the key.

      The fact still stands, when it comes to prototypes ACO has never been interested in IMSA specs or shown any willingness to cooperate, and they won't with DPi's either. ACO does its own thing, always has. If an American series wanted to adopt ACO's specs that was one thing, but ACO adopting American specs-never.
      When you want to say something, say what you mean. Don't make an inaccurate statement that is immaterial to your point.

      As an aside, we've no evidence that GTP wouldn't have been competitive at Le Mans. Nobody in IMSA ever bothered to try and run in it, after all. It would have been entirely down to how good teh car was.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by RS2 View Post
        I do not think that cars so much slower woud go over so well.
        All of the formulae ACO/FIA have proposed for the next top class would result in slower lap times. In fact ACO has been looking at ways to slow down the LMP2 cars.

        From Feb 2019
        LMP2 Performance Level Dependent on Hypercar Class
        The performance level of the next-gen LMP2 cars will be dependent on the eventual placement of the Hypercar class, which looks set to be slower than current LMP1 cars.
        The FIA and ACO have proposed for 3:27 lap times for the yet-to-be-named class at Le Mans, which is within the performance window of current LMP2 machinery.
        While stating there “must be” a gap between the two classes, Nicolet has urged not to jump to conclusions until seeing the full performance of Hypercar, which is set to debut in 2020-21.
        And recent updates make them even slower....slower than current DPi...
        It was confirmed last week that the FIA and ACO’s Hypercar class will be slowed even further, with a new target of 3:30 race laps at Le Mans, which is slower than the performance level of current-gen DPis and LMP2 cars.
        https://sportscar365.com/lemans/wec/...-in-top-class/
        BAN SHREDDED CHEESE! MAKE AMERICA GRATE AGAIN!

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by FormulaFox View Post

          As an aside, we've no evidence that GTP wouldn't have been competitive at Le Mans. Nobody in IMSA ever bothered to try and run in it, after all. It would have been entirely down to how good teh car was.
          And why do suppose no IMSA GTP ever tried to enter LeMans to compete against the Group C cars for the overall? Because they couldn't! An IMSA spec GTP would have run it's own class. Looking at 1986 for kicks, there were only 3 GTPs in the race and they were their own uncompetitive for the overall win class. In '87 there were a couple of Mazdas.

          IMSA had its specs, ACO had theirs. They were incompatible and ACO had zero interest in reconciling GTPs with Group C. Do you really wonder why Porsche and Jaguar had two versions of their cars? It wasn't for the fun of it. If you were an IMSA team and wanted to run LeMans to compete against the Group C teams rather than in than in a tiny side show subclass with no chance of competing for the overall, you had to show up with a Group C legal car. Period.

          If you want to split fine hairs with a dull knife and noodle over what the precise meaning of particular words is do it with someone else. Life is too short.
          The Ayn Rand of Indycar

          No one had to badge the Offy.

          Crapping all over threads since 2000.

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by DaveL View Post

            And why do suppose no IMSA GTP ever tried to enter LeMans to compete against the Group C cars for the overall? Because they couldn't! An IMSA spec GTP would have run it's own class. Looking at 1986 for kicks, there were only 3 GTPs in the race and they were their own uncompetitive for the overall win class
            Yes, a couple of Mazda's early uncompetitive entries, and one of March's junkers. Truly this was representative of the machines that ran in IMSA GTP.

            IMSA had its specs, ACO had theirs. They were incompatible and ACO had zero interest in reconciling GTPs with Group C.
            And they DIDN'T HAVE TO. I've been trying to hint at this the entire time, but the GTP class at Le Mans was kind of pointless because there was NOTHING stopping GTP cars from entering in Group C, where the only changes needed were to meet the fuel restrictions.

            GTP was based on Group C. The rules were not incompatible at all - it was only a matter of what the car builders chose to do. The GTP teams not entering Le Mans had nothing to do with the rules making them uncompetitive, they simply were not concerned with it.

            Do you really wonder why Porsche and Jaguar had two versions of their cars?
            No. Because they didn't.

            Before 1988, the GTP and Group C Jags were built and raced by different entities, it was not Jaguar making two different cars. When TWR entered the picture and took over the IMSA side from Group 44, they used the same car in both series, with the only notable difference between them the Le Mans specific variant of the XJR-9, which was simply an aerodynamic package. Even the XJR-10 and XJR-11, which both raced in 1989, were the same car just with different names specific to which series they were racing in(10 for IMSA because it debuted before the 11), and they went back to using a single number for both with the XJR-12 the following year.

            The only time Jaguar made unique cars for GTP and Group C was in 1991, and even then the only real difference was the aero package and engine tune.

            Now, Porsche did make two different cars because of IMSA's safety regs, but the 962 they built for IMSA would become a beast of a Group C car as well with nothing more than the addition of a "C" to the name - it was identical all the way down to the engine options.

            With this, you can actually say that yes, GTP cars DID compete at Le Mans quite successfully. But that's not what most people are talking about when they talk about GTPs at Le Mans, they're referring to programs like Ford and Chevy, both of whom were simply not concerned with Le Mans.

            If you want to split fine hairs with a dull knife and noodle over what the precise meaning of particular words is do it with someone else. Life is too short.
            You said something that meant something completely different from what you claim to have been trying to say. Pointing out that the statement was wrong is not splitting hairs.

            Comment


            • #21
              The history is interesting, and I fall on Formula Fox's side regarding past IMSA/ACO 'compatibility'. As things progressed, ACO Group C (later C1) and IMSA GTP had more in common than in difference.
              Historical trivia...IMSA and ACO came together in 1998 for a one off race in Tampa FL. A Nissan GTP ZX-T won and a C1 Porsche 962 took second. Note there were also GTP Porsche 962 entered.
              https://www.racingsportscars.com/res...988-11-27.html

              However, this thread was intended to focus on the near future, not the past.

              The bottom line for the ACO and FIA is they have no formula for 2020 and are rapidly running out of time to define one. And any prospective manufacturers are running short of time to find budge, commit, design, build and test a new car. If they don't decide very quickly, they may well lose Toyota, the only mfg they currently have.
              BAN SHREDDED CHEESE! MAKE AMERICA GRATE AGAIN!

              Comment


              • #22
                Big milepost (kilometerpost?) coming up for WEC...
                Plans to allow road-going hypercars to race for outright honours in the FIA World Endurance Championship will be abandoned if no manufacturers make a firm commitment this week.
                https://www.motorsport.com/wec/news/...-2020/4388218/
                BAN SHREDDED CHEESE! MAKE AMERICA GRATE AGAIN!

                Comment


                • #23
                  And, just to add to WEC's troubles with the new top class, they must figure out what to do with LMP2, who are currently faster than the target times for the new top class. The LMP2 competitors are starting to grouse.

                  https://sportscar365.com/lemans/wec/...nder-hypercar/
                  BAN SHREDDED CHEESE! MAKE AMERICA GRATE AGAIN!

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    DPi seems like the least painful option, but that means the ACO would have to swallow their pride.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      More views from media.
                      From across the pond
                      http://www.dailysportscar.com/2019/0...r-survive.html

                      From our side of pond.
                      https://sportscar365.com/lemans/wec/...hypercar-regs/

                      The meetings this week look to be critical.
                      BAN SHREDDED CHEESE! MAKE AMERICA GRATE AGAIN!

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by LAindycarfan80 View Post
                        DPi seems like the least painful option, but that means the ACO would have to swallow their pride.
                        As I've said numerous times before, DPi is a no go in it's current form. The manufacturers the ACO needs to attract don't want it.

                        DPi2.0 is another question entirely butwith what IMSA is talking about with it thus far, the ACO wouldn't have to swallow their pride to adopt it because it'd be right in line with what they're trying to do already(just with a few more cost-saving measures in place).

                        Comment

                        Working...
                        X